The main problems of operational-search counteraction to bribery in Russia (based on the example of the practice materials in the Komi Republic)

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (1) ◽  
pp. 151-157
Author(s):  
Vladimir Danko
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Practical Experience ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Komi Republic ◽  
Legal Problems ◽  
Subject And Object ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Object Of Crime

The work is carried out on the basis of special methods of knowledge, including historical-legal, logical, formal-legal. In the article, taking into account scientific sources and practical experience, the legal problems of operative-search counteraction to crimes provided for in Article 290-291.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are considered. The analysis of bribery is realized jointly, because there are identical characteristics in all its corpus delicties – the same subject and object of crime. The existing norms of criminal and criminal procedure laws in relation to bribery are analyzed. Principal operative-search measures used in documentation of bribery are determined. They are surveillance and operational experiment. Their difference is justified and successful use examples are examined. An actual statistics of the Komi Republic for 2015-2018 is given. The lack of normative securing for interaction between operational subdivisions and preliminary investigation body is ascertained. Based on personal practical experience some measures to counteract bribery are proposed.

scholarly journals THE OBSTRUCTION OF THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE AND PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION: PROBLEMS OF THE OBJECT AND THE OBJECTIVE SIDE

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 97-105
Author(s):  
Alexandra Vladimirovna Boyarskaya
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Complex Analysis ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The Body ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Russian Federation

The subject. The article is devoted to the investigation of the main direct object and the circle of victims are subjected of harm by criminal acts stipulated by pts. 1, 2 of art. 294 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.The purpose of the paper is to identify does the art. 294 of Criminal Code of the Russian Federation meets the other provisions of criminal procedure legislation.The methodology of research includes methods of complex analysis, synthesis, as well as formal-logical, comparative legal and formal-legal methods.Results and scope of application. The content of art. 294 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation does not comply with the provisions of the criminal procedure law. The discrep-ancy lies in terms of the range of participants in criminal proceedings and the functions performed by them, as well as the actual content and correlation of such stages of criminal proceedings as the initiation of criminal proceedings and preliminary investigation. In addi-tion, the current state of art. 294 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation does not take into account the ever-widening differentiation of criminal proceedings.The circle of victims listed in pt. 2 of art. 294 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation should be supplemented by such participants in the criminal process as a criminal investi-gator, the head of the investigative body, the head of the inquiry department, the head of the body of inquiry. At the same time, the author supports the position that the criminal-legal protection of the said persons should cover not only their activities at the stage of preliminary investigation, but also of the entire pre-trial proceedings as a whole.The circle of criminal acts provided for in art. 294 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Fed-eration, should also be specified with an indication of encroachment in the form of kidnapping, destruction or damage to such a crime as materials of criminal, civil and other cases, as well as material evidence.Conclusions. The content of art. 294 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation does not comply with the provisions of the criminal procedure law. The author formulates the conclusion that the circle of victims listed in pt. 2 of art. 294 of the Criminal Code should be broadened and joins the position that the criminal-legal protection of these persons should cover not only their activities at the stage of preliminary investigation, but also of the entire pre-trial proceedings as a whole.

scholarly journals Some Aspects of Prevention and Investigation of Damage to the Railway Telecommunications Facilities

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 358-365
Author(s):  
Igor Ozerov ◽  
Olga Katayeva ◽  
Denis Rudov ◽  
Elena Cherkasova ◽  
Anastasia Volchenko ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Expert Knowledge ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Customs Union ◽  
Telecommunications Infrastructure ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law

The authors study the issues of preventing the damage to the railway telecommunications infrastructure by analyzing the current criminal procedure legislation, criminal legislation and criminalistics views on the methods and means of counteracting crimes under Art. 215.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. They present the algorithm of actions of the law enforcement employees and the specialists servicing the railway facilities when such offences take place. The authors analyze the procedural investigative activities regarding the employees of the organizations that service the railway infrastructure. The investigation of crimes under Art. 215.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation requires expert knowledge in the sphere of servicing railway transport. The authors specifically examine some evidence acquired during the preliminary investigation and the methodology of some investigative actions (interrogation of witnesses, representatives of the aggrieved party, inspection of the crime scene). They analyze the procedure of evaluating the damage inflicted on sophisticated telecommunication facilities. They also single out a number of special characteristics of the investigative methodology for crimes under Art. 215.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation when specialists in servicing complex telecommunications facilities are called to give testimony. It is noted that countries bordering on the Russian Federation and members of the Customs Union are gradually harmonizing their criminal and criminal procedure legislation with the legislation of the Russian Federation. The paper states that today the Russian Federation has sufficient legislative base to form a system of preventing crimes against railway telecommunications infrastructure. In conclusion the authors present a number of measures to counteract crimes under Art. 215.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, offer their brief description and the recommendations for using them. They stress the necessity of cooperation between the owners of the railway facilities, the law enforcement bodies and the mass media.

scholarly journals On the problem of establishing a condition for compensation for damage and making amends for damage when a criminal case (criminal prosecution) is terminated in connection with the appointment of a criminal law measure in the form of a court fine

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 129-134
Author(s):  
I.V. Fatyanov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Compensation For Damage

The article examines the ambiguity in the interpretation of article 76.2 of the Criminal code and article 25.1 of the Criminal procedure code of the Russian Federation to establish terms of compensation for the damage and (or) smoothing caused by the crime harm. The author substantiates the argument about the fallacy of considering this condition only formally, the author focuses on the mandatory establishment in this case of the characteristics of the identity of the guilty person and the measure of public danger of the committed act. The scientific novelty of the article lies in the approach proposed by the author to the study of the problem of establishing such a condition. In particular, the author considers it essential to solve such a problem to study the legal nature of compensation for damage and compensation for damage when a criminal case (criminal prosecution) is terminated on this basis. The author defines the specifics, identifies the main purposes of such a legal phenomenon in the context of a legal problem. The article concludes that if the preliminary investigation body and (or) the court (justice of the peace) the lack of property harmful consequences from the crime, the failure to make reparation is not to be considered as an obstacle to the termination of criminal proceedings on the grounds provided by article 25.1 of the Criminal procedure code of the Russian Federation, article 76.2 of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation. As a conclusion, the scientific work has prepared a specific text of the interpretation of the condition in the relevant explanations of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, which will exclude ambiguity on this issue from the law enforcement officer.

scholarly journals Problems of legal regulation of the seizure of electronic information carriers and copying information from them in the course of investigative actions

2020 ◽  
pp. 169-174
Author(s):  
Alexander Shigurov ◽  
Nikolay Podol’nyy
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Electronic Information ◽  
Storage Media ◽  
Mandatory Participation ◽  
Electronic Storage ◽  
The Russian Federation

The authors raise a number of urgent problems arising from the seizure of electronic information carriers and copying information from them in the course of investigative actions. The article proposes to expand the circle of bodies to which telecom operators are obliged to provide the electronic information stored by them with their subscribers by including all preliminary investigation bodies in them; introduce an independent investigative action into the Code of criminal procedure of the Russian Federation, during which the investigator will, by decision of the court, recover data stored by communication operators. The authors substantiate the need for dissemination provided for in art. 164, 1641 of the Code of criminal procedure of the Russian Federation guarantees of the rights of owners of electronic storage media for all categories of crimes. The article criticizes the provisions of part 2 of art. 1641 of the Code of criminal procedure on the mandatory participation of a specialist in the seizure of electronic storage media.

scholarly journals Problems of Implementing the Criminal Procedure Policy in Crime Prevention

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 401-408
Author(s):  
Igor Antonov ◽  
Igor Alekseev
Keyword(s):  
Crime Prevention ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Social Conflicts ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Theory Of Law

The authors use a communicative approach to the theory of law in their analysis of criminal procedure policy and its role in crime prevention. This approach allowed them to determine the content of criminal procedure work that lies outside the scope of criminal law. This content is its ability to regulate social conflicts of criminal law character. Within this framework, the criminal procedure is viewed as a platform for resolving social conflicts, the sides use it to resolve a conflict between them in socially acceptable ways in the process of communication. The involvement of the aggrieved party in the process of communication in connection with the crime intensifies the correctional impact of the criminal process and its significance for crime prevention. The authors suggest using simplified measures of criminal procedure law for reforming this process and basing it on the procedure of terminating a criminal case with the imposition of a court fine as a measure of criminal law influence. They suggest using the same approach when terminating a criminal case due to the reconciliation of the sides, with one exception: during the reconciliation of the sides, only grounds provided for in Art. 76 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation should be proven. If they are established, the investigator is obliged to petition to the court and the court, having established their validity, should decide to terminate the criminal case.

scholarly journals The features of participation of the defender and the legal representative of a juvenile suspect (accused) in the stage of preliminary investigation

2019 ◽  
pp. 196-199
Author(s):  
Анна Кучинская ◽  
Anna Kuchinskaya
Keyword(s):  
Theoretical Analysis ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Representative ◽  
Defense Counsel ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Russian Federation

In the article the theoretical analysis of the provisions of the Russian Federation Criminal Procedure Code, regulating the procedural activities of the defense and the legal representative of a juvenile suspect (accused). The author identified gaps in the current legislation and ways to fill them. Summarizing the materials of judicial practice, the author presents data on the effectiveness of participation of defense counsel and legal representative.

scholarly journals RATIO OF THE LEGAL AND PROCEDURAL STATUS OF THE HEAD OF INVESTIGATIVE BODY

2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 158-165
Author(s):  
T. Yu. Popova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Sense

Article is devoted to search of author's determination of the criminal procedure status of the head of investigative body. Determination of the status is given in it is general legal sense, types of legal statuses, such as the general (constitutional), special (patrimonial), individual, the status of the foreigner and branch legal statuses are allocated. The discussion about a ratio of legal status and a legal status on the basis of which conclusions the author has divided concepts of legal and procedural status per se is given. Are carried to number of elements of legal status of the head of investigative body: the rights and duties provided by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation and specified departmental standard legal by acts of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, SK of Russia and FSB of Russia; the criminal liability regulated by the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the disciplinary responsibility provided by subordinate regulations for non-execution or inadequate execution of the procedural powers; procedural and administrative accountability of activity of the head of investigative body to the head of higher investigative body. Elements of the criminal procedure status of the designated participant of criminal trial, according to the author, are the rights and duties provided by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation; the accountability of activity of the head of investigative body to the head of higher investigative body regulated by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. The author has also mentioned a discussion about existence of criminal procedure responsibility of participants of criminal legal proceedings. In article the maintenance of each of elements of the status and justification of reference of each of them to this or that type of the status is opened. Proceeding from the considered structure, the concept of the criminal procedure status of the head of investigative body as the position of the head of the investigative body including his procedural laws, duties and accountability to the head of higher investigative body regulated only by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation is formulated.

scholarly journals ON SOME COMMENTS ON THE NORMATIVE FORMULATIONS FOR THE PURPOSE OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (1(63)) ◽  
pp. 127-133
Author(s):  
Виктор Николаевич ГРИГОРЬЕВ
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Legal Situation ◽  
Law Enforcement Officials ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation

The purpose of Russian criminal proceedings, which is very important among the modern social and legal institutions, is nevertheless deficient in its legal and regulatory form. It is noted that in the modern situation, some formulations of the purpose of criminal proceedings have come into conflict with the real social and legal reality. Purpose: to resolve contradictions between the formulations of the purpose of criminal proceedings and the actual social and legal reality. Methods: the author uses the methods of dialectical and formal logic, comparison, description, observation, interviewing, experiment, analysis, interpretation. Results: a theoretical basis has been developed for the choice, in the event of a conflict between the formulations of the purpose of criminal proceedings and the actual social and legal situation, of whether to change the normative formulation of the purpose of criminal proceedings or whether to change the procedure itself. In choosing the subject of reform, preference is given to traditional Russian values. Modern trends in Russian criminal proceedings do not fully reflect the needs of civil society in the Russian Federation. It is more accurate to assume that this is the result of a system of departmental and bureaucratic measures to distribute influence and burden. From a humanitarian standpoint, it would be more correct to return the criminal justice system to a state where it will again reflect the lost purpose, in particular, protecting individuals from unlawful accusations. The first step should be to remove from law enforcement officials the obligation to be unilateral in the examination of evidence and to represent only one party – the accusation (Chapter 6 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation), as well as to remove the normative prohibition for the preliminary investigation and inquiry bodies to gather evidence defending the accused (Part 2 article 15 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document